The 2012 elections were the first using new redistricting maps based on 2010 Census data. As a result of redistricting, the number of swing races that are competitive was expected to drop below 100.[1] Redistricting was considered a draw between Democrats and Republicans, with both parties gaining advantages in some states.[2] Democrats would have required a net gain of 25 seats to re-take control of the U.S. House.[3] The 2012 election produced the largest class of Latinos to ever enter Congress, while simultaneously showing the biggest increase in total seats held by Latino representatives in the history of the House. There were 22 incumbent Latinos on the ballot, and as many as nine additional challengers were considered possible to win. A total of 30 Latino members were elected to the 113th Congress.[4][5]

For only the fourth time in 100 years, the party that pulled the most total popular votes nationwide did not win control of the House.[6][7] Democratic candidates nationwide tallied more votes than Republican candidates. The last time this occurred was in 1952, when Democrats won the popular vote but Republicans won the House. The other two times this phenomenon took place was 1914 and 1942, when Republicans won the popular vote but did not win the most seats.[8] Republicans were not required to win a single Democratic-leaning district in order to hold their majority, owing to the fact that 241 districts have GOP-leaning populations.[9]

Following the general election, Democratic candidates held on to nine seats that had a political lean favoring Republicans by 54% or more. This is down from prior to 2010 where Democrats held 32 seats in that same environment. With regards to ticket-splitting, there were 24 districts in which one party's nominee carried the presidential vote and the other party's nominee won the congressional race. All but four of which were won by an incumbent.[10]

In 2010, 53 incumbents lost to challengers with Republicans swinging 60 total seats in their favor.[11]

Partisan breakdown

Heading into the 2012 election, Republicans were the majority party in the U.S. House. A total of 218 seats were needed for a majority. Republicans could have lost as many as 24 seats in the November election and still maintained control of the chamber. Democrats needed to win at least 25 seats to take back the partisan advantage.

A Washington Post article in May 2012 indicated that the Republican House majority was no guarantee, based on polls indicated the vulnerability of some incumbents in neutral districts.[12] A Politico story in May 2012 pointed to California as the likely state that would determine whether Democrats win control of the House.[13] An October 24, 2012, article in Bloomberg Businessweek indicated that Republicans were in a "strong position" to retain their majority in the House. Political analysts predicted that Democrats could gain up to 10 seats on election night.[14][15] A Salon article highlighted that while Democratic candidates won more than a million votes over Republican candidates in the 2012 general election, most of the votes were clustered around urban areas as opposed being broadly dispersed across the country. There are 47 districts with a partisan divide of 70 percent to 30 percent in favor of Democrats. Only 23 such districts exist on the Republican side. Of the 16 districts where the partisan divide is 80% to 20% or more, Democrats represent 15 of them.[10]

Margin of victory

There were a total of 435 seats up for election in 2012. The following table shows the margin of victory for each race winner, which is calculated by examining the percentage difference between the top-two vote getters. If the race was uncontested, the margin of victory is listed as 100%. Some general facts:

30 races (6.9 percent) had a margin of victory of less than 5 percent. Of those 30 races, 18 were Democratic winners while 12 were Republican.

33 races (7.6 percent) had a margin of victory between 5 and 10 percent. Of those 33 races, 15 were Democratic winners while 18 were Republican.

87 races (20 percent) had a margin of victory between 10 and 20 percent. Of those 87 races, 23 were Democratic winners while 64 were Republican.

285 races (65.5 percent) had a margin of victory of greater than 20 percent. Of those 285 races, 145 were Democratic winners while 140 were Republican.

The fewest votes were in Texas' 29th District, with only 95,611 total votes. Incumbent Gene Green (D) faced two third-party candidates in the general election.

The most votes were in Montana, with 479,740 votes cast. Montana has a total population of 998,199 -- which is roughly 250,000 above the average district size in states without single districts. Because Montana has only one district for the whole state, its voters per district is higher than the rest of the country. The average size of each district is 709,000. The second-most votes cast came in Colorado's 2nd District, with 421,580 total votes.

The average margin of victory of all congressional districts was 31.85%, meaning that on average the winner of each race received nearly twice as many votes as the top opponent. Average MOV for Democratic winners was 35.7%, while the average for Republicans was 28.6%.

The average number of votes cast per district was 281,917, yielding an average voter turnout of 39.76%.

Margin of Victory in 2012 United States House of Representatives Elections

Campaign finance

More than $1 billion was spent by candidates, political parties, and special interest groups during the 2012 election cycle.[26] Republican-leaning organizations spent $102 million on U.S. House races during the 2012 cycle while Democratic organizations spent $79 million.[27] According to the Sunlight Foundation, the DCCC spent $61,741,050 on the 2012 elections. Of those funds, 47.78 percent achieved the desired result, based on Sunlight Foundation analysis. The NRCC spent $64,653,292 on the 2012 elections. Of those funds, 31.88 percent achieved the desired result.[28]

After the first 15 months of the 2012 election cycle, candidates for the U.S. House had raised more than $566 million. That sum is $57 million more than the same point in 2010, and double the level at the same point in the election cycle as the 2002 races. Of that $566 million, Republicans raised $335 million while Democrats raised $221 million. The 2010 campaign set a fundraising record of $1.1 billion.[29] In April 2012, House Democrats reserved more than $32 million in ad time in districts across the country. The reservations by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee included 14 states, predominantly swing states. Headlining the spending was $8 million in Florida and $3 million in Ohio.[30] As of November 3, 2012, 26 races had seen more than $5 million in outside spending. In 2010, there were only two such races.[31]

In September 2012, the NRCC raised $12.4 million and had $29.5 million cash on hand.[32]

In October 2012, the Campaign Finance Institute and the Brennan Center for Justice released reports detailing the high levels of independent expenditures in the election cycle. The Campaign Finance Institute report determined that between October 5-12, more than $1 million was spent by outside groups in 3 House races alone. Those races are:[33]

Using the Federal Election Commission's October Quarterly campaign finance filings, the report examines the relative spending presence of non-candidate groups, candidates, and small donors in these races - "which will likely determine which party will control the House."[35] A number of trends were identified regarding the volume, potential weight of outside spending and breakdown of campaign funding by party, including:

As of the end of the most recent reporting period, less than 60% of money spent on the 25 most hotly contested races came from the candidates' campaigns on average, and over 50% of the spending for 11 of the races were from outside groups/party committees.

The combined reported expenditures from the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) mirror the total spending by "Republican-leaning and Democratic-leaning outside groups" in the 25 races going through the second week of October.

The role of small donations in influencing election outcomes could be eclipsed by the comparatively massive funding influence of the NRCC, DCCC, and other outside groups. "Excluding Florida's 18th District, where incumbent Allen West (R) raised a staggering $7.4 million in small donations through September 30th," Republican and Democratic candidates in the rest of the races raised only 7.6% and 12.4%, respectively, of money from donations under $200.

On October 24, 2012, the DCCC borrowed $17 million to spend during the remainder of the 2012 elections. First reported in Politico, the money was intended to balance out the bombardment of GOP ads in the media.[38] According to a report in The Washington Post, House Republicans have been able to spend more money during the election cycle.[39]

Quarterly reports

On October 15, 2012, quarterly reports were submitted by campaigns to the Federal Election Commission. The political blog Daily Kos did an analysis of the fundraising figures, specifically looking at three areas:[40]

2) Races where challengers had more cash-on-hand than the incumbent: 10 races qualified -- six Democratic challengers and four Republican challengers had more cash-on-hand than their incumbent opponent.

Of the 10 races, the challenger was victorious in 4 of them, 4 D, 0 R.

Challengers who have more cash-on-hand than their incumbent opponent in the third quarter

DCCC

As of July 14, 2012, the DCCC had raised $96,754,717 and spent $70,064,229, leaving $27,496,113 cash on hand.[41] As of October 2012, the DCCC had raised $53.3 million from small donations during the election cycle -- which was $15 million more than during the entire 2010 election.[42]

NRCC

In October 2012, the NRCC launched 16 new ads for a total spending of more than $6 million. The purchases were in the following districts:[43]

Competitive races

RealClearPolitics

The website RealClearPolitics listed 50 districts in order of likelihood to switch party on November 6. Twenty of the 50 U.S. House seats most likely to switch party control were held by Democrats. The remaining 30 belonged to Republicans. Those districts are listed in the table below.[44]

Of the 20 seats held by the Democrats, 9 flipped. Of the 30 seats held by the GOP, 17 flipped. Of the 50 seats listed, they became 28 D, 22 R.

Center for Voting and Democracy

The Center for Voting and Democracy (Fairvote) released its projections in October 2012. According to the organization, there were 177 projected Republican winners, 156 projected Democratic winners, and 102 "no-projection" districts. Additionally:[82][83]

238 districts had a Republican-tilt in partisanship

189 district had a Democratic-tilt in partisanship

8 districts were even

According to the study, Republicans were "far better positioned than Democrats to win control of the House."[84]

Redistricting

The 2012 elections were the first using new maps drawn as a result of the 2010 Census. The breakdown of states that won and lost new seats in the Congressional reapportionment is as follows:[85]

However, while population gains have generally taken place in Republican states, projections show the bulk of the increases are from minorities -- particularly in states like Arizona, Florida and Texas.[88] Minorities generally lean Democratic in elections.[89] According to an estimate by Salon.com, Republicans could have gained 15 new seats nationwide if they chose to impose "brutal" maps.[10]

Of the top 10 Congressional districts that needed to lose population -- meaning they were the fastest growing districts over the past decade in the country -- all of them were won by a Republican in the 2010 election. That implied, that Republicans would have an easier time spreading their voters across more districts while still managing to try and maintain a safe majority in those overly-populated districts. The most-populated district is the 3rd Congressional seat in Nevada, which has a population of 1,002,482. The least-populated district is the 1st Congressional seat in Nebraska, with 611,333 residents.[90]

According to Mike Shields, the National Republican Congressional Committee’s political director, redistricting "has taken a lot of seats off the table for Democrats."[91]

In 2010, the 10 closest U.S. House races were won by the following House members:[92]

A report by the Brennan Center for Justice indicated that California's redistricting likely cost the Democrats a chance at taking control of the U.S. House.[93] According to the report, Democrats were able to draw 44 congressional seats while Republican legislatures were responsible for 173 seats.[94]

Congressional approval rating

Throughout the 112th Congress, public sentiment was critical of the performance of elected officials. On February 8, 2012, Gallup released a poll in which a record-low of 10 percent of Americans approved of Congress. Viewpoints on Democrats and Republicans were equally negative.[95] "This Congress has been judged by almost everybody as the least productive, most confrontational Congress in a very, very long period of time," said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland).[96]

Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.

Generic congressional ballot

RealClearPolitics

Each week, RealClearPolitics releases a table with an aggregate of the generic congressional vote from a variety of polling organizations, including Rasmussen Reports, Politico, NPR, USA Today/Gallup and Bloomberg.[97]

Generic Congressional Ballot -- Average from RealClearPolitics

Poll

Democratic

Republican

10/1/12

44%

45%

9/1/12

44.2%

44%

8/1/12

41.8%

43%

7/1/12

44.3%

43%

6/1/12

44.2%

44.3%

5/1/12

41.3%

42.5%

4/1/12

43.6%

44.8%

AVERAGES

43.34%

43.8%

Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org.